Monarchy is the tie that binds us together

In his forthcoming book on the Queen, Professor David Flint does
not just lay out the now well understood arguments against
Australia becoming a republic but also articulates reasons for its
remaining a monarchy. The case against any particular form of
republic is a strong one, as the 1999 referendum result
demonstrated. The case for the monarchy is equally strong but much
less frequently put as it relies on instincts that are deeply felt
but not easy to justify in a relentlessly utilitarian age.

The very idea of the monarchy offends people accustomed to think
in aggressive slogans. It's "foreign", although that has never been
held against other institutions to which great deference is offered
(such as the United Nations). It's shared with other countries, but
so is our language and no one (so far) wants to change that. It's
hereditary (like looks, intelligence, aptitudes and even property).
It embodies irksome notions of allegiance, duty and hierarchy (as
if any society can exist without them).

For people anxious to be "modern", the real problem with the
monarchy is that they didn't think of it first. Its origin is lost
in the historical mists and it has evolved to suit the needs of
numerous times other than our own. The idea that this generation
might not be uniquely wise or entitled to disregard the work of
centuries is alien to the modern mindset, or at least that which
pervades our public debate.

Still, there is some reason to think that long-standing
attachments and traditional loyalties have not entirely lost their
appeal. Support for Australia becoming a republic (as measured by
Newspoll) is 8 per cent below its 2000 peak. Strong support for
becoming a republic is actually at its lowest among young people.
Although the monarchy has been out of favour since 1993 (when
Newspoll first recorded more republicans than monarchists), 29 per
cent of people aged between 18 and 34 remain uncommitted on the
question, with 26 per cent of young people actually against
Australia becoming a republic. Given almost all commentators' need
to declare themselves republican, this suggests that the young may
be less conformist than their parents.

Perhaps people have perceived that the monarch is more than just
another celebrity; or perhaps, notwithstanding the general
ignorance of Australia's history and political system, people
retain a sense of how deeply the monarchy is entrenched in
Australia's institutional arrangements.

As Flint clearly and concisely outlines, the monarch's primary
role is to provide a political personality above and beyond
politics. In Australia, the governor-general mostly discharges this
role. It is hard to conceive of an elected or appointed president
acting with the dignity and restraint that has so far characterised
the monarch's representatives, including those who have been
ex-politicians. Governor-General Michael Jeffery is reported to be
displeased that he is not more widely known. In a
controversy-obsessed public culture, his starring at thousands of
civic events while staying completely out of the headlines is
actually a sign of how well he is doing his job.

The monarch has an important symbolic role too: as "fountain of
justice and honour"; guardian of the integrity of the armed forces
and the public service; embodiment of the unity of the Commonwealth
of Nations; and a reminder of the transcendent in the life of the
world. In each case, the monarch represents that ideal of duty and
service that is always beyond the reach of actual human beings but
towards which all should strive.

In the case of Queen Elizabeth, the real and the ideal have
almost overlapped. Aged just 21, she declared that her whole life
would be devoted to the service of the "great imperial family to
which we all belong" and over the subsequent 59 years no one can
fairly accuse her of betraying this pledge.

Australians are privileged to have a claim on such a woman. In
an age accustomed to the breaking of the most sacred promises, she
has lived every day of her public life mostly with grace and charm
but above all else with a constant and selfless devotion to the
service of her far-flung people.

At the opening of the Commonwealth Games in Melbourne this year,
young Harry White paid the Queen a simple but heartfelt 80th
birthday tribute: "You have been the glue that held us all together
in good times and bad times. The love and great affection that we
all hold for you is spread across one-third of the world's
population."

The monarchy is profoundly at odds with the spirit of this age
(and gloriously impervious to the fads of all times), which is why
contemporary intellectuals are republicans almost to a man and
woman. Still, as Pascal observed, the heart has reasons that reason
cannot know.

The monarchy is unlikely to disappear while human beings retain
their respect for order, continuity, ceremony and that which
summons us to be our best selves.

(This article is based on the introduction to David
Flint's forthcoming book, Her Majesty at 80. Tony Abbott
is a minister in the Howard Government.)

SPONSORED LINKS

1164476200735-theage.com.auhttp://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/monarchy-is-the-tie-that-binds-us-together/2006/11/28/1164476200735.htmltheage.com.auThe Age2006-11-29Monarchy is the tie that binds us togetherTony AbbottOpinion